Difference between socialism and capitalism

 Capitalism and socialism are generally seen as polar opposites, and discussions of either system are often framed as in opposition to the other. The modern idea of socialism has roots in Greek philosopher Plato but emerged as a popular political idea in the early 19th century among German radicals like Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. There are many forms of socialism, but at its core, socialism is an economic system in which a whole community — not just bosses or private companies — control the means of production equally. It assumes that people are naturally cooperative, instead of competitive. The goal of socialism is an egalitarian society run by democratically elected representatives for the benefit of all in accordance with a set of collectively determined parameters; unlike under capitalism, industry and production is run by the state, and the acquisition of private property is seen as counterproductive. Capitalist critics of socialism believe that the system slows economic growth, rewards worker laziness, and can stifle individual rights and free expression.

In a capitalist country, the focus is on profits over anything else; in a socialist country, the public is seen to be more important, and social welfare is a major priority. The United States, the U.K., and Germany are examples of modern capitalist countries. Many other countries like Norway, Sweden, Canada, and the Netherlands incorporate socialist ideas into their societies, as does the U.S. to some degree; for example, universal health care and Social Security are both socialistic concepts

Effects of capitalism

 The kind of impact that capitalism has on your life depends on whether you’re a worker or a boss. For someone who owns a company and employs other workers, capitalism may make sense: The more profits your company brings in, the more resources you have to share with your workers, which theoretically improves everyone’s standard of living. It’s all based on the principle of supply and demand, and in capitalism, consumption is king. The problem is that many capitalist bosses aren’t great at sharing the wealth, which is why one of the major critiques of capitalism is that it is a huge driver of inequality, both social and economic.

Capitalism takes the position that “greed is good,” which its supporters say is a positive thing — greed drives profits and profits drive innovation and product development, which means there are more choices available for those who can afford them. Its opponents say that capitalism is, by nature, exploitative, and leads to a brutally divided society that tramples the working classes in favor of fattening the rich’s wallets. The Occupy Wall Street movement, for example, began as an anti-capitalist protest against “the 1%” — the richest of the rich of the capitalist class — and asked why they are allowed to grow fat and happy while 20% of all American children live in poverty

Who is a capitalist

 Individual capitalists are typically wealthy people who have a large amount of capital (money or other financial assets) invested in business, and who benefit from the system of capitalism by making increased profits and thereby adding to their wealth. A capitalist nation is dominated by the free market, which is an economic system in which both prices and production are dictated by corporations and private companies in competition with one another, and places a heavy focus on private property, economic growth, freedom of choice, and limited government intervention. Generally, those to the right of the political spectrum tend to be pro-capitalist; those on the left veer toward anti-capitalism.

History of capitalism

 The origins of capitalism are complicated, and stretch back to the 16th century, when the British systems of power largely collapsed after the Black Death, a deadly plague that killed off up to 60% of Europe’s entire population. A newly formed class of merchants began to trade with foreign countries, and this newfound demand for exports hurt local economies and began to dictate overall production and pricing of goods. It also led to the spread of colonialism, slavery, and imperialism.

The death of feudalism — a hierarchical system often seen as oppressive that kept poor people bonded to their masters’ land, which they farmed in exchange for a place to live and military protection — also left rural British peasants with no homes and no work, which eventually funneled them away from the countryside and into urban centers. These former farm workers then had to sell their labor in a newly competitive work environment in order to survive, while the state worked in concert with the new capitalists to establish a maximum wage and “clamp down on beggars.”

By the 18th century, England had converted into an industrial nation, and the dawn of the Industrial Revolution saw an explosion of manufacturing overtake the island. It is within those smoky factories and flammable textile mills that our modern idea of capitalism — and the opposition to it — began to fully flourish. In 1776, Scottish economist Adam Smith published his treatise, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, which is regarded as the bedrock upon which modern capitalism stands. Though some of his specific ideas about value and labor differ from those of modern economists, Smith is often called “the father of capitalism.

Socialist system in capitalism

 The socialist challenge of capitalism required an effective response. The first chapter of this rivalry was opened in the late nineteenth century. Chancellor Otto von Bismarck, in his struggle with the strong German socialist movement, turned towards the introduction of welfare institutions. Pension system, health care, and other welfare institutions were introduced for workers to take the wind out of the sail of the emerging socialist movement. For these developments, the Great Depression of the early 1930s brought about a turning point. The Swedish Social Democratic government, elected in 1932, started building a welfare state. President Franklin D. Roosevelt also initiated major social legislation and the introduction of the social security system. The comprehensive system of the welfare state, however, emerged only after World War II in Western Europe. Capitalism, in contrast with its nineteenth century features, initiated widespread social legislation. Paid vacation, short workweek, nationwide pension systems, free health care, education, maternity leave, cheap housing, and many other institutions were established. Human rights were re-evaluated and the right to work, i.e., a full-employment policy, became dominant. Inequity, at least in the middle layers of the society, markedly diminished in the advanced capitalist countries.

The period after the Second World War also saw the spread of mixed economies. Almost all of the advanced Western European countries, led by France and Britain, nationalized entire sectors of their economies and established new state-owned firms in various industries.

Capitalism underwent a spectacular transformation. In his article on The Instability of Capitalism (1928), the leading Austrian-American economist, Joseph Schumpeter, prophesied the transformation of the system and the fading of the original meaning of capitalism. He maintained that capitalism is inherently stable and able to recover from great crises, but generates socio-intellectual effects discordant with its spirit and institutions. As a consequence, ‘Capitalism is … in so obvious process of transformation into something else … [that] it will be merely matter of taste and terminology to call it Socialism or not.’

Towards the end of the twentieth century, capitalism adjusted to the new historical situation and markedly transformed but preserved entrepreneurial interest, market flexibility, efficiency, competitiveness, and reached its highest prosperity and fastest growth rate ever. The Western core countries of the world system successfully adjusted to a new technological-communication revolution and became the leader of new technologies and the rise of postindustrial society.

During the long period of postwar prosperity, a part of the former Asian and South European peripheries of the capitalist world system reached a higher than average growth and became an integrated and equal part of the core countries. After a long period of rivalry, capitalism emerged victorious while the parallel world system of centrally planned state socialism, which conquered one-third of the world and influenced an even greater part by its policy after World War II, collapsed in 1989–91. The former Soviet Bloc countries introduced radical market reforms, thus re-establishing capitalism. During the last third of the twentieth century, laissez-faire capitalism became the leading model again. Neo-liberal economics triumphed and challenged mixed economy and welfare state.

Capitalism in late twentieth century reached a new stage in its history. The main trend of this new age is globalization. National boundaries and national economies rapidly lost their importance. Multi- or transnational companies penetrated previously independent economies. Foreign direct investment became instrumental all over the world, including the advanced core countries. Towards the end of the 1990s nearly one-third of American exports and two-thirds of imports were intrafirm deliveries. About one-third of French, Dutch, and British industrial output was produced and roughly 25–40 percent of their research and development expenditure was financed by affiliates of transnational companies. In Ireland, and former state-socialist Hungary, foreign affiliates produced two-thirds of industrial output and financed roughly 70 percent of research and development expenditures.

While globalization, in some cases, contributed to a successful catching-up process with the core, it also preserved and even strengthened the core–periphery inequity. The gap between advanced core and the peripheries was growing considerably: intercountry income spread was 10:1 in 1913; 26:1 in 1950, but it increased to 40:1 at the end of the twentieth century. A newly globalized but even more polarized capitalist world system, dominated by an expanding Western core, was emerging at the turn of the millennium.

Capitalism : An overview

 Capitalism has its own particular geography, which must be attended to if we are to adequately understand its nature, and limits. Our very definition of capitalism references the form capitalist practices took once they arrived in Europe, and discourses presenting capitalism as the best economic system neglect the violence inflicted on other peoples and places in making this happen. This European version of capitalism fails to deliver on its promise of prosperity in part due to geography. Capitalism's spatial extent means that it produces persistent uneven geographical development, enriching some at the expense of others and necessitating experimentation with alternatives. Its dialectical relationship with labor and the more-than-human world can undermine its coherence from the outside. Finally, the persistence of more-than-capitalist practices is testimony to capitalism's less than hegemonic status in practice, notwithstanding discourses presenting it as currently globally hegemonic.

IELTS preparation:short and free

 STOP PAYING FOR IELTS PREPARATION"

-----------------

Its completely out of my understanding why people spend money to prepare for IELTS.

I see a lot of people confused and worried about where should they prepare for IELTS test.

Some take classes on-campus while some join skype sessions and pay large sum of cash for these services.

I just want everyone to know that there is a free self-paced online course available on the internet which is designed by the academics of University of Queensland.

This innovative preparation course has been designed and written by experienced English teaching professionals from The University of Queensland, an IELTS testing centre and one of the world’s leading centres of learning. All of the course writers have extensive experience enabling students to reach their academic IELTS goal of entering a university where English is the primary language.

Now whats the point of paying money and learning from someone who has no official association with IELTS test centre.

https://www.edx.org/course/ielts-academic-test-preparation

P.S Those who are looking for IELTS General module please know the fact that Academic is always more difficult. So it's advised that you first take this course and then buy one book of IELTS 9 10 OR 11 and prepare from it for general test. There is just a minor difference only in the writing module which you would know from the book.

For those who are asking about the mock exam. Well you can buy a simple IELTS book IELTS 9, IELTS 10 or IELTS 11. It comes with a CD and you can conduct your own exam at home.

Link for mock tests:

https://ieltsonlinetests.com

Website link added for mock tests. جزاءک اللہ

Please note that if you cant prepare it by yourself and you want someone to spoon feed you i.e. in an academy/coaching/tuition, you'll never be able to get good marks at exam. How can you expect that a local guy can teach better than the faculty of Queensland and those people who work at IELTS?